tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16646992.post2960996321557526065..comments2023-10-14T23:56:22.016-10:00Comments on Reflecting Light: A hero's welcome to the U.K.: handcuffs?Rick Darbyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02371910140619422820noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16646992.post-49321703819924519802009-02-13T06:02:00.000-10:002009-02-13T06:02:00.000-10:00We know now that Wilders was refused admission the...We know now that Wilders was refused admission the U.K., though not arrested. Wilders made his point, or rather the British authorities cooperated in making it for him. The incident has not gone unnoticed — even the left-wing media can't resist a dramatic story, however they try to slant it.<BR/><BR/>David,<BR/><BR/>It is simply uncanny how often events in contemporary Britain seem to be a movie remake of the appeasement years, 1933–1938. Appeasement (Part I) is at least understandable: memories of the carnage and "missing generation" of the Great War were still fresh in people's minds, sons and husbands had disappeared in the mud of the trenches, and you can understand the urge to wishful thinking concerning Hitler.<BR/><BR/>But how to explain Appeasement, the remake? There are many factors: the belief in Marxist circles that they could use Muslim immigration to destroy conservative, middle-class Britain; unwillingness to acknowledge having made a mistake by Islamizing the country; and, once again, that wishful thinking that is so great a factor in human behavior.Rick Darbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02371910140619422820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16646992.post-56938807752432085362009-02-12T17:01:00.000-10:002009-02-12T17:01:00.000-10:00In late-1930s Britain, appeasement wasn't just abo...In late-1930s Britain, appeasement wasn't just about placing unwise faith in a treaty...it also had domestic implications. Winston Churchill spoke of the “unendurable..sense of our country falling into the power, into the orbit and influence of Nazi Germany, and of our existence becoming dependent upon their good will or pleasure…In a very few years, perhaps in a very few months, we shall be confronted with demands” which “may affect the surrender of territory or the surrender of liberty.” A “policy of submission” would entail “restrictions” upon freedom of speech and the press. “Indeed, I hear it said sometimes now that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticized by ordinary, common English politicians.” (excerpt is from The Last Lion: Alone, by William Manchester.)<BR/><BR/>Churchill’s concern was not just a theoretical one. Following the German takeover of Czechoslovakia, photographs were available showing the plight of Czech Jews, dispossessed by the Nazis and wandering the roads of eastern Europe. Dawson, editor of The Times, refused to run any of them: it wouldn’t help the victims, he told his staff, and if they were published, Hitler would be offended. (same source as above.)<BR/><BR/>When a German diplomat named Ewald von Kleist came to Britain, at great personal risk, to warn the government about Hitler's true intentions, he was treated with contempt. Neville Chamberlain: "There are certainly a great many arguments which might be brought to bear against his allegations. We have recently heard other voices from Germany claiming that Hitler's warlike intentions are to be taken seriously and, consequently, this suggests that we should respond to them with gestures of conciliation." The British ambassador to Germany, Henderson, urged the government to ignore any warnings issued by von Kleist and his associates. "Their information," he asserted, "is one-sided, partisan, and intended soley as propaganda against Hitler."David Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15464681514800720063noreply@blogger.com